What are the surgical options for recurrent rectal prolapse - a retrospective single-center experience.

IF 0.6 Q4 SURGERY
Tomasz Kościński, Krzysztof Szmyt
{"title":"What are the surgical options for recurrent rectal prolapse - a retrospective single-center experience.","authors":"Tomasz Kościński,&nbsp;Krzysztof Szmyt","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0016.2727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Most authors highlight the absence of international guidelines in the treatment of recurrent rectal prolapse (RRP), even among coloproctologists. However, it is clearly indicated that Delormes or Thierschs surgeries are reserved for older and fragile patients, so on the other hand, transabdominal surgeries are dedicated to generally fitter patients. The aim of the study is evaluation of surgical treatment effects for recurrent rectal prolapse (RRP)Methods: The study group comprised of 20 female and 2 male patients aged from 37 to 92 years (subjected to treatment last 20 years). Initial treatment consisted of abdominal mesh rectopexy (n=4), perineal sigmorectal resection (n=9), Delormes technique (n=3), Thierschs anal banding (n=3), colpoperineoplasty (n=2), anterior sigmorectal resection (n=1). The relapses occured between 2 to 30 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reoperations consisted of abdominal without (n=8) or with resection rectopexy (n=3), perineal sigmorectal resection (n=5), Delormes technique (n=1), total pelvic floor repair (n=4), perineoplasty (n=1). 11 patients (50%) were completely cured. 6 patients developed subsequent RRP. They were successfully reoperated (2 rectopexies, 2 perineocolporectopexies, 2 perineal sigmorectal resections).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Abdominal mesh rectopexy is the most effective method for RP and RRP treatment. Total pelvic floor repair may prevent RRP. Perineal rectosigmoid resection results of less permament effects of RRP repair.</p>","PeriodicalId":43422,"journal":{"name":"Polish Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.2727","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Most authors highlight the absence of international guidelines in the treatment of recurrent rectal prolapse (RRP), even among coloproctologists. However, it is clearly indicated that Delormes or Thierschs surgeries are reserved for older and fragile patients, so on the other hand, transabdominal surgeries are dedicated to generally fitter patients. The aim of the study is evaluation of surgical treatment effects for recurrent rectal prolapse (RRP)Methods: The study group comprised of 20 female and 2 male patients aged from 37 to 92 years (subjected to treatment last 20 years). Initial treatment consisted of abdominal mesh rectopexy (n=4), perineal sigmorectal resection (n=9), Delormes technique (n=3), Thierschs anal banding (n=3), colpoperineoplasty (n=2), anterior sigmorectal resection (n=1). The relapses occured between 2 to 30 months.

Results: Reoperations consisted of abdominal without (n=8) or with resection rectopexy (n=3), perineal sigmorectal resection (n=5), Delormes technique (n=1), total pelvic floor repair (n=4), perineoplasty (n=1). 11 patients (50%) were completely cured. 6 patients developed subsequent RRP. They were successfully reoperated (2 rectopexies, 2 perineocolporectopexies, 2 perineal sigmorectal resections).

Conclusions: Abdominal mesh rectopexy is the most effective method for RP and RRP treatment. Total pelvic floor repair may prevent RRP. Perineal rectosigmoid resection results of less permament effects of RRP repair.

复发性直肠脱垂的手术选择-回顾性单中心经验。
目的:大多数作者强调缺乏治疗复发性直肠脱垂(RRP)的国际指南,即使在直肠科医生中也是如此。然而,明确指出Delormes或Thierschs手术是为年长者和身体虚弱的患者保留的,而另一方面,经腹手术是为一般较健康的患者提供的。本研究旨在评价复发性直肠脱垂(RRP)手术治疗的效果。方法:研究组为女性20例,男性2例,年龄37 ~ 92岁(治疗时间近20年)。初始治疗包括腹部网状直肠固定术(n=4),会阴sigmo直肠切除术(n=9), Delormes技术(n=3), Thierschs肛门捆扎术(n=3),阴道肿瘤成形术(n=2),前sigmo直肠切除术(n=1)。复发发生在2至30个月之间。结果:再手术包括腹部不切除(n=8)或合并切除直肠固定术(n=3)、会阴sigmo直肠切除术(n=5)、Delormes技术(n=1)、全盆底修复(n=4)、会阴成形术(n=1)。11例(50%)完全治愈。6例患者出现后续RRP。再次手术成功(2例直肠切除术,2例会阴直肠切除术,2例会阴直肠直肠切除术)。结论:腹壁补片固定术是治疗RP和RRP最有效的方法。全盆底修复可预防RRP。会阴乙状结肠直肠切除术的效果较RRP修复效果小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信